TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1219
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deducting the bid amount. After some payments in installments were made the petitioner became irregular in making the payments of the installments towards the chit fund. In order to discharge his liability, the petitioner issued cheque bearing No.645580 dated 14th September, 2006 for Rs.5,47,740/- drawn on Indian Overseas Bank in favour of the complainant with the assurance that the same would be honoured on presentation. When the cheque was presented the same was dishonored with the remark 'account closed' vide memo dated 21st September, 2006. Thus the respondent issued a legal notice dated 16th October, 2006 under Registered AD and UPC. The notice sent through UPC had been duly served on the petitioner, however notice sent through registe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deration on the issue of territorial jurisdiction for 22^nd May, 2009 as both the cheque and the accused arrayed were not of Delhi. On 3rd June, 2009 the learned Metropolitan Magistrate proceeded to issue non-bailable warrants against the petitioner returnable for 15th November, 2010. The petitioner discovered that two other complaints were pending titled as 'Sri Ram Investment and Finance Company Vs. Gajender Sharma'. However, no files could be located as the same were transferred. The petitioner had no knowledge of the case, however an application for inspection of the judicial file was moved when it was revealed that the address of the petitioner provided in the notice and the complaint were fictitious. 4. Challenging the order dated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the ld.Trial Court after recording evidence during trial. At present, it is sufficient that since accused was not served for 02.06.2008, the vakaltnama in favour of Sh.Sushil Singh Advocate is not available on the file of trial court, the bail bond of the accused was not taken, it can be presumed that he was wrongly marked present. 8. But that is not the end of the matter. Now the accused has come to know of the case. It will be in the fitness of things to direct him to appear before Ld. MM without waiting for fresh service of summons on the address of 37B, Bhawani Pur, Kanpur, UP given by him in the revision. Accordingly, it is directed that issuance of NBW is set aside. The accused is directed to appear before Ld. MM on 19.10.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lanation. 8. A report has been received from the District and Sessions Judge office, Headquarter according to which two persons responsible for the weeding of the record were Shri B.S. Rawat and Ms. Raj Kumari who were required to take necessary precaution for preservation of the record in compliance of the order of this Court, however they have since passed away, thus no action can be taken against them. Thus this Court has proceeded to hear the matter on the basis of records available before this Court. 9. There is no challenge to the finding of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate that the address C-16, Amushi Industrial Area, Nandur Gant, Lucknow, UP was a non-existent address. This was upheld by the revisional Court vide the impug....